 |
 |
 |
05-11-2005, 05:11 PM
|
#1 |
|
|
RICHARD BRUNING ON DESIGNING A NEW DC LOGO
 Okay, so we’ve heard from the press release-y side and the President’s chair about DC Comics new logo, but what about the nitty-gritty design side? Newsarama sat down with DC’s Senior Vice President - Creative Director Richard Bruning to learn about the process and what goes in to designing a new logo. Perhaps one of the largest unsung heroes at DC, Bruning oversees perhaps the largest chunk of everything DC next to its President Paul Levitz. Logo design, look of covers, character styles…Bruning has a hand in it all. He was more than happy to pull back the curtain on the process behind coming up with a new logo. Newsarama: First off, Paul said that you were intimately involved with this go-round at designing the new logo. As best you can, describe the process from pitch to final picture. Richard Bruning: About five years ago there was as sense around the company of all the changes that we’d been going through, the changes in the marketplace, the new areas that we were going into – like DC Direct and such, along with the television shows and the films that were getting back up on their feet, as well as the development we were seeing in editorial – it just felt like it was a time for a change in our external expression, since we felt there were so many changes going on internally. NRAMA: In other words, a logo change… RB: Right. The mark that Milton Glaser developed back in the mid-‘70s has obviously served us very well, but the large caveat was that it was built for one purpose, and one purpose only, when we were just letterpress superhero comics. That’s all it was, that’s all he could have built it for. Not long after that, ironically, was when the world of comics started changing, with the advent of the direct market and everything that rolled from that. When I worked at DC as Design Director from 1985-1990, I was stuck in a situation where we tried to, not modernize the bullet, but at least play with it a little to try and give it a little different flavor, because we’d started moving to prestige format, graphic novels, and more serious, mature material. So, we tried reducing it in size, and occasionally tried something foolish like turning it upright – and then we’d get our heads slapped, and we’d turn it back again – but we played with it in different ways as we could. The other problem we ran into was that as we moved into other areas, and got into things like manufacturing toys or action figures or statues, the physical construction of the bullet, the little hairlines that are built around all the letter shapes, made it very difficult to reproduce on any other medium or form than large and on paper. That’s where the practical implications of it, from a designer’s point of view began. I’d become aware of the limitations of the bullet much earlier than five years ago, but it wasn’t a situation where we felt we had to make a change.  But with the real core content changes happening in the company, with the development of new areas of products, that’s when it started to feel like it was, emotionally, the right time.NRAMA: So those were the concerns that led into the attempts to change it five years ago? RB: Right. We took a run at it, as Paul mentioned, and came up with some interesting things, but we weren’t going to walk away from the DC bullet unless we felt for sure that we had something better for the moment. I give Jeanette [former publisher Jeanette Kahn] and Paul a chunk of the credit for it – we spent a good chunk of money on trying some new designs, but ultimately, we decided that we weren’t going to put it out there because we paid for it. We backed off because we didn’t feel like we had the right solution, something that emotionally felt correct for us. Two years ago, we had the added impetus of knowing that the Batman film was starting production. We had a lot of faith that it was going to be a big film from our conversations with Christopher Nolan and such. Meanwhile, our friendly competitors at Marvel had their logo displayed prominently in front of all of their films; it was inevitable that the decision was made that we should display our logo very prominently in front of our films. So we combined all of our emotional, evolutionary, and practical business reasons into kick starting another go at a new logo. So, Georg Brewer [Vice President - Design & Retail Product Development] and I started the program up again, talking to designers and people in house, and started producing hundreds and hundreds of ideas to try and find the right flavor and right direction for this mark. NRAMA: What were some of the major concerns you had going in? RB: We wanted something that was modern, but not so trendy that it would be dead two days later. We wanted something that was classy, but not retro-classic. It had to have a certain spark to it, and we wanted to keep as many elements of the existing mark as we could, so we dissected the defining elements of the exiting mark: a circle, “DC” was bold, and there were stars. From there, we tried to figure out how to reconfigure those into some form that spoke with a fresh voice while reflecting upon the past to some degree. I think the new mark, as we ended up with it, hit most of those notes, as much as anything as subjective as art or design ever can. It’s flexible, but visually, it’s very strong. NRAMA: Just so this is clear from the outset – even though we’re talking about you and Georg as working on the new mark, you didn’t design it yourselves, right? RB: Right. The logo was designed by a young man here in New York by the name of Josh Beatman from Brainchild Studios. We had a number of people submitting ideas, and finally it came down to a blind submission where we did not have names or company names associated with the designs for the final selection. Josh came to work with me 13 years ago or so, when I was freelancing out of a studio downtown here, between my two tenures at DC. He had seen a cover I had done for something like American Freak at Vertigo – I’d been getting into Photoshop with the designs and just having the time of my life, and he came in and said he’d love to work with me. He wasn’t a comic book fan, but thought the work I was doing was interesting enough to make him seek me out. We had a very rich and rewarding collaboration during those years. When I came back on staff in ’96, he took over the studio and my clientele, and expanded it much beyond that. So – it wasn’t favoritism that we chose Josh’s version, because Paul had no idea who submitted what, he only looked solely at the design. But I have a tremendous sense of pride that someone I was able to teach, and watch grow as an artist and designer in his won right was the winner. If I couldn’t do it myself, having Josh do it was the closest damn thing to it, and that makes me feel very good at the end of the day. NRAMA: Back to the process, how many designs made the semifinals?  RB: Without getting into the nuances of every design, we narrowed it down to about nine designs to present to Paul, because he didn’t want to see the hundreds of variations we’d come up with, because he knew it would drive him crazy, plus he trusts Georg and I, which I am always very grateful for. We put nine up on the wall, and George and I had already done a pre-cut – we knew how we ranked them. But we were shocked – Paul, almost on every single one, called it the same way as Georg and I had. By the time we were done, we were all laughing, because we knew we were all headed toward the same goal, which is a wonderful experience to have. NRAMA: As you said, the logo that Glaser designed in the ‘70s was more strictly about comics than this one is. With that in mind, when looking for the new logo, one that has to embody not just the publishing, but the entire package that is now DC, what concepts needed to shine through? For example, a quick look at the logo would tell someone who knew nothing about DC what? RB: Our world is about energy. It’s about power. It’s about creativity. And that’s a kinetic energy in movement, even if it’s not a physical energy at times. Again, and not to fault Mr. Glaser’s design, the previous mark was flat. It was created to be flat. Two forces, one over the last decade or so, particularly due to the computerization of design work, embossed and three dimensionalized company marks have become very prevalent. The mark as Milton created it was virtually impossible to move into anything other than a flat representation. If you tried to emboss it, or turn it, or do anything to it, it was unforgiving in that sense. It wouldn’t do that. So, going into it, that was one of our goals – we really wanted to be able to lift it off the page. We wanted it to convey motion and convey energy. Well, you’re still working in a static medium, so how do you do that? In this case, by using the star, both as a historic element, and using it in motion. By taking the star and having it move in space, as it moves from small and dark in the back to lighter and larger in the front, you innately build motion into it. That was the way that solution helped this mark pop out from all the other designs – it has motion built into it, and that was what we thought was going to be one of our most difficult challenges to achieve. And as you’ll see when the film version comes out, it lends itself extraordinarily well to animation. The other thing was that we wanted “D” and “C” to be bold. Bold and clean and readable from a mile away, no mater what size it was. As it now stands, we tested the mark to incredibly tiny sizes – down to a quarter of an inch, and in the simplified version of it, you can still read “D” and “C” – you can tell what it is. That was our other major design hurdle to handle. We also wanted to make sure it looked dynamic and flexible, but didn’t look heavy handed – it shouldn’t look industrial. NRAMA: How did moving from a circle in Glaser’s design to an oval in the new design change things? RB: The circle, ironically, is a very static shape, and is very hard to work into a lot of designs, because it just kind of floats there. Milton’s design was actually very inventive when he made it for the comics. His intent was that it bled off the upper and left corners, and that was always difficult to get people to bleed it at exactly the right angle and the proper places. But that’s how he gave it a little hint of movement – it was coming into the cover from outside. But take that same logo and put it on letterhead and it just sits there. The way we did the DC Spin, as I’ve named it, and I think I’m the only one Paul allows to call it that, we designed with an oval, which carried the element of the old – a circular feel, but it was put into motion by tilting it. That gave it both a modern-ness and a motion, by going to an oval. Those were the key elements, I think. I could drag out some high falootin’ mumbo jumbo that is just made-up and fluffy, but at the core, I think those were the challenges that we faced, and once we got to this mark, we knew we could check them off. When we realized we’d solved our major issues in one design, we breathed a sigh of relief. NRAMA: So in short, this logo will look more at home on different, more dynamic media than comic books whereas Glaser’s flat logo looked a little…flat and older when put on say, a videogame?  RB: Yeah, when we’ve seen it, and we have had it in videogames over the recent years – you’d see something like the six different company logos when a game would start up, and nearly every one was animated or three dimensional. Then you’d hit the bullet, and it was like “thunk.” It was suggested that we should spin it, and I never wanted to do that, because it doesn’t look very good – it draws even more attention to the fact that it’s a very flat thing. There was no natural depth to the mark as Glaser designed it – it was a slice out of something.This logo has an inherent amount of three-dimensionality that we’re able to enhance when necessary. It stands up very nicely to those from other contemporary pop culture companies, which is appropriate, because we, as DC need to show that we’re about the “now,” that there’s freshness to our product, and that has to come across. Yeah, we can still publish the Archive Editions, because we have a past and we’re not trying to ignore that past, but at the same time, we’re very much doing things in the here and now. This mark speaks to that. NRAMA: Speaking of the Archives, their presence speaks to the diversity of DC’s publishing line. Does this new logo, in your view, fit across the whole line of DC’s books, from the nest issue of Superman to the next editions of the DC Archives? RB: It’s interesting, because we’ve had to analyze everything we do for the last few months to see how the new mark is going to apply. That’s been a much bigger challenge than anyone realized, I think. Something like the Archives offers an inherent dilemma – do you mess with it or not? I daresay there are some of us who are still questioning that – what’s the right thing to do with that? I won’t tell you what the answer is, because we’re still thinking it through. NRAMA: Are you saying there’s a faction that thinks perhaps collections of the older material should keep the older logo? RB: I’ll be honest - I’m the faction. Even though I’m one of the people who worked to create the new mark, I think we need to be appropriate. 99% of the time, the appropriate thing will be to put the new mark on it. But when you stand back and look at a row of Archives on someone’s shelf, with the DC bullet on it, you really want to see that continue. I was on staff back when we designed the Archives, and it was our first attempt to really heavily brand a line of books predominantly through design. We intentionally gave the books a very heavy-handed design that would carry through for years. We wanted the end result to be something that, if you put it up on the shelf, you could tell from a mile way those they were the Archive Editions. So it’s very hard for me emotionally to consider changing that. We’re going back and forth on that. Paul has been tremendously supportive, and even though a lot of people think of Paul as old fashioned, he’s one of the first people to be telling us to put the new mark on something. We’re putting our eggs in that basket, but there are some logical questions that come up as we move through the line. The Archives are one of them. DC Direct is the one area where we developed the one serious manifestation that’s different from the core logo. You’ll see the connection between the two, but since DC Direct is a very large, and almost independent business for us, we felt it needed its own mark, but it had to connect to the new, core mark. It was a challenge, but I think we solved it fairly well. NRAMA: With the release of the new logo, as well as the press release that went with it about DC looking to strengthen its branding across the Warner Brothers family, in your view, has “branding” taken a larger importance at DC, and if so, what does it mean for your position? Is it heralding in a new era of more work for you? RB: That’s what it feels like [laughs]. I think branding has become a more prevalent issue in the world in general, certainly in any business. It’s become an unavoidable aspect as people have come to realize that consumers respond to an identity or a mark on many levels. People associate it to a certain lifestyle or personality or whatever, and we’re not used to that in comics. We obviously come from a world of passionate readers and creators and we focus predominantly on the work and what we do with it. As you move out to something like a film, it’s an extension of the comic brand on to the film. What we realized was that since we feel we have a strong company and a strong direction collectively, we felt that strengthening the DC identity or brand has value to the world, as a whole and our company as a business, because more people want to work with us, because we know what we’re about. So the word “brand” has come up more around here in the last couple of years than it has in the previous ten, I’d say. NRAMA: Going back a little and talking about the execution of the new mark, as Paul mentioned, there will be various iterations of the new logo to compliment the specific covers of the comics it appears on. Can you explain a little more about that? RB: In the creation of most logos or brands for companies, 99% of the time, you pick a color, and that’s the corporate color. The challenge for DC has always been that we have such a multi-color environment that it was always a challenge to have a single color. Once Milton’s design was adapted and implemented into the company, the bullet saw loads of colors – pink bullets, fuchsia bullets, purple bullets – anything went, pretty much, because we didn’t have a rulebook that said you couldn’t. In designing and developing this, we looked at it very carefully to see what colors it looked good in, what colors it didn’t, and asked ourselves if we really needed a fuchsia logo now. We worked very closely with Dan Didio on this aspect, and he felt that the fewer colors we used, the better. It reinforced the identity of what DC was about, it wasn’t a distraction, and you avoided accidental, God-awful color combinations. So we ended up for our purposes in house, we found that there are three colors that look good on virtually all of our books: blue, which will be the default primary color; red; and black, which is needed for black and white applications. If you put those on our covers, and we did – one of those three colors looks perfectly fine and feels very appropriate. In general though, the blue will be used for all our corporate needs. Red will be used for comic applications, mainly – if we license something out, we’re going to be pushing them to use the blue, because it’s going outside of our world, and we want to reinforce the identity of DC in the clearest fashion possible, which is to go primarily with a single color. We have a glow effect that appears around the mark, which is good because it adds another level of excitement and energy, which is particularly appropriate on comics, and it also helps pull the mark forward, separating it from the artwork underneath. We’re going to try and consistently apply it on all the covers in terms of sizing and placement – there’s no reason to bounce it all over the cover as we have sometimes in the past. NRAMA: As we've kept namedropping, Glaser was the master of simple and dynamic branding, and his work lasted for nearly 30 years. How long are you looking at this one lasting? RB: As long as it lasts until I’m out of here… [laughs]. Seriously though, this is one of the great challenges for any designer or art director – you want to create “the classic” mark. You want to create the Coca-Cola, but you can’t know that. It’s like saying you want to direct the all-time favorite film. You don’t go into it with that. You go in with a set of goals, desires, and whatever vision you can bring to it. If you can match the final product to that, then you’ve done the best you can do. Time is the one that tells you whether or not you created something that will be seen as a classic. We hope this mark will be around for at least 30 years. As far as we’re concerned, it has no expiration date. |
|
05-11-2005, 05:36 PM
|
#2 |
|
|
...You know, it just occurred to me. Doesn't this new logo look like it would really fit as the band for a professional hockey team?
|
|
05-11-2005, 05:39 PM
|
#3 |
|
|
maybe it will grow on me... but i just don't like it.
|
|
05-11-2005, 05:45 PM
|
#4 | |
|
|
Take the blue pill...
Quote:
But let's be blunt: Marvel's logo is red and has been burned into moviegoers' brains worldwide. DC needs to stick with blue, period. I hate to say it, but honestly people who know zilch about comics often think Batman and Spider-Man are from the same company. People "know" Marvel--it's time for DC to make it loud & clear that they aren't in any way, shape or form related to another comics publisher. Stand out, be unique. Marvel's got people remembering their bright red (and very one-dimensional  ) logo long after the movie's over. DC needs to make their blue logo stand out just as vividly and create a wholly-individual logo that no consumer will ever confuse with another company.Pepsi woke up to this fact 7 years ago with their change to a blue color scheme that bluntly differentiates them from "that other cola."  . DC, stay true blue!  |
|
|
05-11-2005, 05:47 PM
|
#5 |
|
|
I love the new logo...they should have change the outdated bullet style years ago.
Long live the new DC!!!! For the changes in the DC universe will truely be magnificient!!!! |
|
05-11-2005, 05:47 PM
|
#6 |
|
|
They said they spent a good chunk of change trying to come up with a new logo previously, then scrapped it. Then they do it all over again and this is it? You would think they could come up with something better than that. It looks like someone spent 5 minutes on it.
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:00 PM
|
#7 |
|
|
Okay, what is this, the 4th story dedicated to this? And such a lengthy interview to boot about a pretty uninspired 90s sports team logo. DC's starting to reek of desperation for press attention now. The desperation to turn everything into a major press event reminds me of a nicer version of the Jemas years, except with less interesting announcements.
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:03 PM
|
#8 |
|
|
big deal
Is it just me or are they making a big deal about a circle and a star? I mean, c'mon, it's Elementary school level graphic design.
Personally, I think if they wanted to utilize their logo in a new format (ie. movies and videogames), they should have kept the old logo and actually explained what it was through animation. Quite frankly, it took me years to realize I was supposed to be looking at the back of a bullet. A quick, dark animation showing some shadowy theif firing a gun at say Supes, Bats and Wonder Woman, that follows the bullet to it's stopping point, (say Batmans chest armor) and then zooms in on the back of the bullet, revealing the DC logo, to me, that would have been cool. Then maybe flashing the characters within the stars of the logo, much like Marvel does with their logo. I dunno. My opinion is don't fix what isn't broken. Just update it. |
|
05-11-2005, 06:07 PM
|
#9 |
|
|
I think the decision to use a more modern, contemporary logo failed the moment they felt that a group of 60 year olds were the best judge of what was cool. That logo shouldn't have made it past the first round.
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:07 PM
|
#10 |
|
|
As the DC Spin was created to brand all DC's products, then that should include the DC Archive stuff too. That would give everything a uniform feel.
The Bullet logo will always be on the reprints of the original covers anyway. Just my opinion... Growler  |
|
05-11-2005, 06:09 PM
|
#11 | |
|
|
Quote:
Five minutes to make something better in Illustrator? I don't think so. Please show us how Super_Spidey. |
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:23 PM
|
#12 |
|
|
Don't post when tired
Oh boy. Anyone who read my previous posts on this subject must have thought I was nuts. I've been working too many long days and nights, and somhow misread the original announcement, thinking that Glaser designed the new logo. Forgive me.
While I still have great regard for Glaser, and still like the new logo, I apologize for thinking that he created the new one. Going to go to bed for a few days. |
|
05-11-2005, 06:25 PM
|
#13 | |
|
|
Quote:
as long as people like your self are reading the articals why stop publishing them. DC hasn't changed there logo inm thirty years so I can understand why people crowing over it I like the the new logo it makes me think of Saturn , the movment of flying , As well as a finger ring GOOD DAY |
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:30 PM
|
#14 |
|
|
Great interview Matt!
As a graphic designer it's always nice to see what happens behind the curtains of a design (or redesign as in this case). I believe DC made a great gamble that's going to pay off. |
|
05-11-2005, 06:34 PM
|
#15 | |
|
|
Re: big deal
Quote:
I don't think it was meant to look like the back of a bullet (pretty obtuse, especially for 1975), but rather was dubbed such because that's what it thought people looked like, similar to saying it's the 'DC Spin' now. |
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:42 PM
|
#16 | |
|
|
Quote:
I love all the language behind this whole issue of rebranding. It is such a wonderful example of management-speak gobbledly gook designed to obsfucate one simple thing: Their utter failure to brand at all. Hundreds of hours of Smallville, Batman: The Animated Series, Superman, Batman Beyond, Static Shock, Krypto, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited, The Batman, etc have hit the eyeballs of how many millions with nary a DC logo in sight. Now Marvel is getting all sorts of attention for their use of their even more dated logo in front of a couple of films and DC is left flatfooted. Why didn't you use the logo? Uhhhh, we needed a new one, y'know, to show movement, energy, brand us across all media... So their failure to brand is now being celebrated as 'their bold new vision.' And the brand image that so many grew up, the Glaser Logo, gets tossed on the junk heap to divert attention from their failure. So what is this bold new vision? Essentially a one off from the mid 90s Burger King (Re)Design:  is now  |
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:53 PM
|
#17 |
|
|
I just realized: I like blue. I like Pepsi over Coke. I like DC over Marvel. What a coincidence. Color does make a difference.
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:53 PM
|
#18 | |
|
|
Quote:
It's bigger than just the Burger King logo. Swooshes are the biggest graphic design cliche of the 90s, once again showing DC's perpetual role of playing catch-up since the moment Stan Lee started the Marvel age. It's kind of embarassing. Interesting Swoosh reading: http://www.thestreet.com/pf/tech/internet/986150.html (Sadly, this article is from 5 years ago. Swooshes were played out even then) You know it's an uninspired cliche when there are companies that even specialize in generic "swooshing:" http://www.biz-logo.com/pre-designed-cat05.shtml |
|
|
05-11-2005, 06:58 PM
|
#19 | |
|
|
Quote:
WHAT?! Why haven't you mentioned this before?! |
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:02 PM
|
#20 |
|
|
Having worked in the design field and having sat through branding seminars, it was fun to anticipate every word of that interview just from seeing the new logo. Motion, energy, bold, now, new, etc etc. Blah. I understand the reason for the change, but I think DC is fooling itself if it thinks this mark will convey what they are about to people. Marvel just so happens to be a great example of a mark that is nothing but bold faced letters and it's instantly recognizable and works on everything they do. I have no attachment to the bullet, although it ties nicely to the 'Detective' part of DC. I just wish they had somehow incorporated the detective motif, rather than just sending a star zooming around an elliptical orbit in the now-overdone swoosh fashion.
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:12 PM
|
#21 |
|
|
I appreciate your history of the DC logo. I can clearly see the traces of communism throughout the 70s. The new logo looks to be more on the path to liberty and freedom. I wanna shake the hand of the pardner that created it!
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:17 PM
|
#22 | |
|
|
Quote:
don't be fooled. they're still pinkos. especially that winick. |
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:18 PM
|
#23 |
|
|
i kid.
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:19 PM
|
#24 | |
|
|
Re: big deal
Quote:
I don't think it was neccessarily intended as a bullet but just that it got that name just as the new one is referred to as the DC Spin but I completely agree that even if it was a "flat" logo that doesn't mean there weren't lots and lots of ways you could make some great animations using it. Marvel's current logo is about as flat as they come and still they've managed to make it into an interesting animated opening in movies. Sure the new logo might lend itself easier to animation but is that really what DC wants? To be known as the ones that take the easy way out. It might have been time for a new logo, but reading Bruning's statement that "We wanted something that was modern, but not so trendy that it would be dead two days later" I'm afraid I'd have to say they missed the mark cause that's exactly how I see this new logo. I'm happy to hear that they've talked about how this new logo might not work well with the Archives cause to me at least that shows they know that it might have its limitations. As for the three different color approach, I'm afraid that won't be enough. Sure if they want the logo to really stand out and dominate the covers, but if they want it to simply be a recognizeable brand that works with the rest of the cover elements I'm afraid it won't be enough. Unlike the bullet the new logo does have a lot of momentum and as a result it will probably get noticed more, but if it at the same time ends up clashing with the title logo then the overall logo could easily end up looking busy and chaotic. I have a lot of respect for Bruning's work though so I'm hoping he can pull it off. On the Donna Troy cover it doesn't look too bad but that's a cover where the title logo doesn't have a real destinctive feel to it unlike the Batman or Superman logos for instance, so it lends itself a lot better to logos like that. The fact that we have a starry background makes the saturn-like new logo seem somewhat at home, but what happens once you add it to more moody covers? If you look at the new logo as a seperate entity I can kinda see the appeal but I wonder if they had tried slapping the different submissions on various covers as well as seeing it alone when they had Levitz decide which one he liked the best. What works on the masthead of your stationary might not work as well on the comics. A really good logo however ought to work well on both. It will be interesting to see the new logo applied to other covers than the Donna Troy one. I really hope I'll end up having to eat my words but right now I just don't see it working. Tenz. |
|
|
05-11-2005, 07:26 PM
|
#25 |
|
|
I don't like it. It won't stop me from buying their stuff, but I think it's a mistake and they'll be back to the bullet in less time than it took Coca-Cola to dump New Coke.
BTW - if they have to change the logo, why not wait until 2006 and retire the bullet when it turns 30? At least that would have been symbolic... |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:58 AM.
